Learners should be able to evaluate the credibility of websites and the veracity of their content to follow up only accurate and supported information. This study aimed to investigate whether attention on the same information is allocated differently according to the authoritativeness of a webpage, and whether individual characteristics of topic-specific prior knowledge and epistemic beliefs moderate this process. We used eye-tracking methodology that provides fine-grained data about the amount of visual attention devoted to the same information offered by different sources, both in a quick, automated way and in a delayed, deliberate way. Thirty-nine undergraduates read four authentic webpages, comprising five types of information: URL, text 1, text 2, picture 1, and picture 2, which provided verbal and graphical information about the universal validity of the central dogma of molecular biology. The webpages were situated on a continuum from the most to the least authoritative: institutional, encyclopedic, popular, and alternative. Findings indicated implicit source evaluation, as revealed by more automatic (first-pass fixation times) and delayed processing (second-pass fixation times), which varied according to source reliability. In the first-pass, greater attention was dedicated to the more familiar information within the most credible page. Readers also integrated more words and graphical elements when processing the information in the highly authoritative source during the second-pass reading. Data on individual characteristics “validate”, to some extent, data regarding the patterns of eye movement. In addition, crucial positive relations between integrative eye-movement patterns and web-based learning also emerged.

Source Authoritativeness and Patterns of Eye Movement during Webpage Reading

PLUCHINO, PATRIK;MASON, LUCIA;ARIASI, NICOLA
2013

Abstract

Learners should be able to evaluate the credibility of websites and the veracity of their content to follow up only accurate and supported information. This study aimed to investigate whether attention on the same information is allocated differently according to the authoritativeness of a webpage, and whether individual characteristics of topic-specific prior knowledge and epistemic beliefs moderate this process. We used eye-tracking methodology that provides fine-grained data about the amount of visual attention devoted to the same information offered by different sources, both in a quick, automated way and in a delayed, deliberate way. Thirty-nine undergraduates read four authentic webpages, comprising five types of information: URL, text 1, text 2, picture 1, and picture 2, which provided verbal and graphical information about the universal validity of the central dogma of molecular biology. The webpages were situated on a continuum from the most to the least authoritative: institutional, encyclopedic, popular, and alternative. Findings indicated implicit source evaluation, as revealed by more automatic (first-pass fixation times) and delayed processing (second-pass fixation times), which varied according to source reliability. In the first-pass, greater attention was dedicated to the more familiar information within the most credible page. Readers also integrated more words and graphical elements when processing the information in the highly authoritative source during the second-pass reading. Data on individual characteristics “validate”, to some extent, data regarding the patterns of eye movement. In addition, crucial positive relations between integrative eye-movement patterns and web-based learning also emerged.
15th Biennial Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction - Responsible Teac hing a nd Sustainable Learning
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11577/3033973
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact